OBJECTIVES: To generate consensus among dermatologists on the content of an outpatient discharge checklist, to create one and to seek clinicians' opinions on its usefulness.
METHODS: Seventeen consultant dermatologists from five National Health Service trusts completed a 72-item Delphi questionnaire. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate each item for importance in contributing to a high-quality discharge decision. Eighteen clinicians completed a questionnaire evaluating checklist use.
RESULTS: Consensus was determined when ≥ 75% of consultants rated an item 'very important' or 'important'. There was strong inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0·958) and fair inter-rater agreement (Fleiss kappa = 0·269). There were 26 consensus-agreed items, condensed to 13 that formed the 'traffic-light' checklist. These are disease-related issues (diagnostic certainty, disease severity, treatment appropriateness, patient manageable in primary care, patient's benefit from follow-up), patient empowerment issues (understanding diagnosis and treatment outcome, having a clear plan, treatment side-effects, ability to self-manage) and addressing concerns (patient concerns, easy reaccess to secondary care, whether patient and clinician are happy with the decision). Twelve clinicians (67%) found the checklist useful, 11 (61%) wanted to use it in future, 10 (56%) thought it was useful for training and three (17%) said it helped their thinking. Clinicians suggested its use for auditing and for training clinicians and administrators.
CONCLUSIONS: Items were identified to create an outpatient discharge information checklist, which demonstrated high acceptability.
METHODS: The Assessing Doctors' Attitudes on Palliative Treatment survey was revised for cultural context, translated into six languages, and distributed electronically to physicians who care for children with cancer. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. Secondary analyses used the Pearson chi-square test or Fisher exact test to examine associations between prior PC training and physician subspecialty with reported barriers. The McNemar test was applied to evaluate differences between actual versus ideal timing of PC consultations. Analysis of variance was conducted to compare mean values for perceived barriers across country income levels.
RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-one physicians from 18 countries participated, with an overall response rate of 27% (621/2,305) and a median country response rate of 30% (range, 11%-85%). Most respondents (n = 366; 59%) believed PC should be consulted at diagnosis, but only 18% (n = 117) stated that this occurred in their clinical setting (P < .001). The most highly ranked barriers to PC provision included limited physician knowledge (n = 511; 82%), lack of national health policy/advocacy (n = 494; 79%), lack of PC-trained clinicians (n = 492; 79%), lack of home-based services (n = 487; 78%), and physician discomfort in discussing PC (n = 483; 78%). Physicians practicing in lower-middle-income countries rated these barriers more significantly.
CONCLUSION: Physicians report a discrepancy between ideal and actual timing of PC integration and identify several barriers to PC provision. Study findings will inform capacity building, education, and advocacy initiatives to improve the timing and quality of PC delivery in the region.
METHODS: The validated Assessing Doctors' Attitudes on Palliative Treatment survey was modified for use in AP, translated into six languages, and adapted for cultural relevance. The survey was distributed electronically between February 2022 and February 2024 to physicians caring for children with cancer in 18 AP countries. The primary outcome was alignment with WHO PC guidance, calculated as a mean percentage per physician. Secondary analyses explored associations between demographic variables and WHO alignment scores using regression analyses. Open-ended responses were analyzed qualitatively.
RESULTS: A total of 621 physicians from 18 countries participated (median country response rate 30%; range, 11%-85% per country). Most (70%; n = 432) had >10 years of clinical experience and no prior PC training (65%; n = 401). Although 57% (n = 352) had access to pediatric PC experts, only 50% (n = 308), 36% (n = 221), 27% (n = 166), and 34% (n = 209) expressed comfort addressing patient/family physical, emotional, spiritual, and grief/bereavement needs, respectively. Additionally, 40% (n = 248) reported feeling burdened addressing end-of-life suffering. The mean alignment with WHO guidance was 76% (range, 48%-92%). Almost all (>90%; n = 570) desired further PC training.
CONCLUSION: Study findings demonstrate that most physicians in AP expressed discomfort with providing core components of PC to patients with cancer and their families. This study signals the urgent need for focused expansion of PC services and training and identifies regional opportunities to improve PC education, research, and advocacy efforts.